Democracy: the missing link in the devolution debate Devolution in England could change the way we are governed and create a fairer dispersion of power, with more opportunities for people outside of Westminster to have a say. An overriding focus on economic growth currently threatens to de-rail devolution by encouraging local governments to promise economic outcomes they could struggle to deliver, outcomes which are not necessarily in the residents’ best interests. Presently the debate on devolution neglects the • Environmental sustainability is part of just democratic transformations that could make 0.8% of arguments. devolution worthwhile. In this research, we map arguments in favour of devolution produced by • Only 2.9% of arguments address the central government, local government, think- potential downsides and risks of devolution. tanks, and civil society groups between 2011 and 2015. • Local governments in particular seldom consider the impact of devolution on democracy, discussing democratic outcomes Key findings less than central government or think-tanks. • Of the arguments made for devolution, 41.6% focus on achieving economic growth as the main justification for devolving Introduction power. Decentralising power from Westminster to • Only 12.9% of arguments make the case regions is a debate with a long history, one in for devolution in order to shift power, which numerous governments have engaged, strengthen democracy, and increase citizen offering various regional power structures involvement in decision-making. for the devolution of government functions and decisions – not least in Scotland, Wales, • Just 7.4% of arguments address inequalities and Northern Ireland. Following the 2014 in wealth and power between regions. Scottish independence referendum and the 2 Democracy: the missing link in the devolution debate 2015 UK general election result, discussions Methods of devolution now have a renewed sense We mapped arguments in favour of devolution of urgency. Momentum is growing behind produced by central government, local local authorities joining to create combined government, think-tanks, and civil society authorities and negotiating with Whitehall over groups using a sample of documents covering the devolution of powers in health, housing, the period December 2011 to June 2015.3 We planning, enterprise, employment, skills, and coded documents for the outcomes referenced transport. New agreements for devolution are in each argument, covering economic, social, being announced on a regular basis. The Cities environmental, and democratic dimensions. and Local Government Devolution Bill, which We also coded for arguments which address provides a legislative underpinning for making potential downsides and risks of devolution devolution agreements, is passing through including failures of local leadership, parliament. exacerbation of inter-regional inequalities, Voices in the debate are overwhelmingly and increases in bureaucracy and central positive about the prospect of devolution, government control over local governments. The which is seen as a ray of light in a decade codes were initially developed on the basis of of government spending cuts and political a literature review of academic research, and malaise, but the devolution agreements are not subsequently extended as themes emerged always as comprehensive as local government during coding. advocates hope.1 Nor are they clear about Following coding, we analysed the arguments the social, environmental, and democratic and evaluated the scope and content of the outcomes which devolution could achieve outcomes discussed, applying learning from – tending to focus on important but limited NEF’s work on community development and economic outputs such as the creation of indicators of economic success, and the Crick growth hubs and the development of transport Centre’s work on democracy and participation, networks. as well as other relevant academic research. In order for policy to be successful, In this briefing we outline the shape of the policymakers must be clear about the devolution debate and highlight gaps in the outcomes, or in other words the change, they sorts of outcomes considered. In particular we aim to achieve. New Economics Foundation demonstrate that democratic outcomes are often (NEF) has demonstrated in our work with local sidelined in favour of narrow economic outcomes and national government, that outcomes are which have not usually been discussed with best defined in partnership with the people local people. This leads to a critique of the way to whom they are most relevant – the citizen, in which devolution policy is being progressed, the end user, or the local stakeholder.2 In its and to recommend ways to open up the debate current form, the devolution debate is not to greater participation. creating space for a robust discussion of outcomes or for citizens to have a say. With the Growth is discussed most aim of supporting a more outcomes-focused and participatory approach to devolution, Figure 1 shows how the devolution debate NEF worked with the Crick Centre at the breaks down, in terms of the arguments used University of Sheffield to map the outcomes and the aims discussed. The most common being discussed in the devolution debate. We argument for devolution is that it will achieve aim to show which outcomes are prioritised, greater economic growth, creating cities that will to highlight gaps in the debate, and to make stimulate regional growth that contributes to the it possible for citizen stakeholders – locally national purse. On average, this argument makes and nationally – to have a stronger voice in up 41.6% of arguments made in documents promoting the outcomes that matter to them. proposing devolution. 3 Democracy: the missing link in the devolution debate Figure 1. Prominence of outcomes in the devolution debate 45 41.6% 40 35 30 25 23.7% 20 15 12.9% 10 7.4% 6.1% 4.6% 5 2.9% Average % of arguments per document arguments per % of Average 0.8% 0 Environment Downsides Identity Economic Inter-regional Democracy Effectiveness Economic and risks efficiency equality growth After growth, the second most prominent Democracy is neglected argument is that devolution will improve the Creating a more democratic country by effectiveness of public service delivery by reducing the extent to which power is retained increasing the pace with which services can at Westminster and by increasing the share of respond to local needs, supporting investment in power exercised by voters, especially in England, housing and transport, and reducing duplication is an outcome backed up by the results of in local government activities. This makes up surveys displaying dissatisfaction with the way 23.7% of arguments. England is currently governed through UK- Discussion of other potential aims of devolution wide institutions in Whitehall and Westminster. is much more limited. Making the UK a more In 2014, the Future of England Survey asked a sample of 3,705 adults in England for their democratic country is discussed in a much views on the governance of England and found smaller 12.9% of arguments and addressing that, no matter how the question was phrased, inequalities in wealth and power between the status quo attracted support from no more regions in only 7.4% of arguments. Despite the than a quarter of those surveyed.4 All options potential for devolving elements of environmental for changing governance – from a government and energy policy, outcomes relating to minister for each region to an English parliament environmental sustainability are addressed in just – attracted majority support, but without an 0.8% of arguments. Groups writing in support obvious winner. The Chancellor appealed to of devolution seldom consider the potential this sentiment when he called the Greater downsides and the risks of devolution, focusing Manchester devolution agreement ‘a revolution on its potential advantages and giving hardly in the way we govern England’.5 any attention to the inhibiting impact of austerity cuts on what could be achieved, or the risk The aim of improving democracy is highly that devolution agreements could paradoxically relevant to devolution and yet is not given increase central government’s control over local much attention, being discussed on average governments. Discussion of downsides and risks in 1 of every 10 arguments (12.9%), compared make up only 2.9% of arguments. to 4 in 10 for economic growth (41.6%). 4 Democracy: the missing link in the devolution debate When documents do discuss the potential of As this quote typifies: devolution to reinvigorate democracy, the focus is on three main ideas: “ A vote for directly-elected mayors would help reanimate English democracy by opening up • It will increase the scope for decision-making important new sites of power that are more in by locally elected leaders who are physically tune with local communities.” 8 ‘closer to home’ 6 than MPs. The missing link is the cultivation of citizen • Hence, it will make it easier for the electorate participation and the development of structures to ‘identify, find, interrogate and hold to and mechanisms for doing so, without which 7 account those elected to govern them’. levels of accountability and alienation could be no better than before, for two reasons. First, • This will address discontent and alienation, citizens have to wait until the next mayoral reviving voter turnout and political trust. election to make their voices heard just as they These are promising